The Optics of Abstract Art in the Aesthetic Evaluation of Megalithic Monuments

The study of megalithic art is greatly complicated by its antiquity and lack of data for research. The unprovability of any theories about the origin of megaliths, as well as the motives and artistic goals of their creators, creates an almost insurmountable barrier to the interaction of the modern viewer with these monuments. This paper proposes a research approach that actualizes the value of megalithic art for the modern artistic process and partially overcomes the problem of unknowability. It is based on the direct visual experience of meeting megaliths, which makes it possible to interpret them through a system of fundamental categories of aesthetic perception known today.

The study provides a look at the stone monuments of the past through the prism of modern aesthetics. In the logic of formal analysis, the objects under consideration are compared with abstract compositions of the 20th—21st centuries in order to determine the fundamental properties of a large-scale, fascinating artistic image; for this purpose, their common expressive means and features are highlighted. The accumulated visual experience contributes to the interpretation of megaliths within the framework of the modern artistic process. In the course of the work, actual expressive techniques and solutions appear in the photographic images, which are not noticeable outside the modern context. In an alternative way, this brings the viewer’s consciousness closer to ancient art, allowing them to actualize and rethink its legacy for the current generation. Although the problem of the original, historical and genetic interpretation of megaliths remains open, work with universal categories of aesthetics establishes some models of perception of ancient artifacts that allow us to bridge the time gap in modern consciousness.

1. Alekseeva T.I. Yablonsky L.T. et al. Antropologicheskii slovar’ [Anthropological Dictionary]. Moscow, Klassiks Stil’ Publ., 2003, 328 p.

2. Mirimanov V.B. Iskusstvo i mif: tsentral’nyi obraz kartiny mira [Art and Myth: The Central Image of the World Picture]. Moscow, Soglasie Publ., 1997, 327 p.

3. Gerasimov S.A., Lysenko V.S., Ogai I.P. On Electromagnetic and Acoustic Radiation of Megaliths, Simvol nauki: mezhdunarodnyi nauchnyi zhurnal [Symbol of Science: An International Scientific Journal], 2016, no. 10—3, pp. 194—200 (in Russ.).

4. Motsa S.M., Drosopoulos G.A., Stavroulaki M.E., Maravelakis E. Structural Investigation of Mnajdra Megalithic Monument in Malta, Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2020, no. 41, pp. 96—105. DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2019.07.004.

5. Kochergin V.V. Interpretation of the Three Rings Holes, Built-In Architectural Systems Stonehenge, Arkhitektura i sovremennye informatsionnye tekhnologii [Architecture and Modern Information Technologies]. 2013, no. 2 (23), pp. 1—8 (in Russ.).

6. Marsadolov L.S., Paranina G.N. Methods and Methodology of Complex Studies of Ancient Sacral Megalithic Objects, Narody i religii Evrazii [Nations and Religions of Eurasia], 2012, no. 5, pp. 166—183. Available at: https://journal.asu.ru/wv/article/view/2332 (accessed 05.05.2025) (in Russ.).

7. Kuzmin Ya.V. Geoarkheologiya: estestvennonauchnye metody v arkheologicheskikh issledovaniyakh [Geoarchaeology: Methods of Natural Sciences in Archaeological Studies]. Tomsk, Izdatel’skii Dom Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, 2017, 396 p.

8. Parker J. (ed.) Written on Stone: The Cultural Reception of British Prehistoric Monuments. Newcastle-on-Tyne, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2009, 175 p.

9. Dubrovskaya O.S. Evolution of Cult’s Statues from Stone to the Monument. Parti. Stones-Idols, Idols Made of Stone, Gods and Heroes, Academia. Arkhitektura i stroitel’stvo [Academia. Architecture and Construction], 2011, no. 3, pp. 32—40 (in Russ.).

10. Hawkins G., White J. Stonehenge Decoded. Moscow, Mir Publ., 1984, 256 p. (in Russ.).

11. Lancaster Brown P. Megaliths, Myths, and Men: An Introduction to Astro-Archaeology. New York, Taplinger Publishing Co., 1976, 328 p.

12. Marsadolov L.S. Sacral Archaeology and Classification of Megaliths, Teoriya i praktika arkheologicheskikh issledovanii [Theory and Practice of Archaeological Research], 2016, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 44—62. DOI: 10.14258/tpai(2016)3(15).-04 (in Russ.).

13. Lippard L. Overlay: Contemporary Art and the Art of Prehistory. New York, Pantheon Books Publ., 1983, 253 p.

14. Amizlev I. Land Art: Layers of Memory, the Use of Prehistoric References in Land Art: Thesis or Dissertation. Montréal, 1999. Available at: https://umontreal.scholaris.ca/items/67a51255-5250-426d-b3f9-79193bd5ea26/full (accessed 05.06.2025).

15. Schama S. Landscape and Memory. New York, A.A. Knopf Publ., 1995, 652 p.

16. Heizer M. Sculpture in Reverse. Los Angeles, Museum of Contemporary Art Publ., 1984, 112 p.

17. Kulemin A.E. Archaic in the Art of Place: Land Art, Kul’tura i iskusstvo [Culture and Art], 2024, no. 5, pp. 112—121. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0625.2024.5.40918 (in Russ.).

18. Arnheim R. Art and Visual Perception. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1974, 386 p. (in Russ.).

19. Kant I. The Critique of the Power of Judgment. Moscow, Iskusstvo Publ., 1994, 368 p. (in Russ.).

20. Golding J. Paths to the Absolute: Mondrian, Malevich, Kandinsky, Pollock, Newman, Rothko, and Still. Princeton, Princeton University Press Publ., 2000, 240 p.

21. Moreno G. In the Mind but Not from There: Real Abstraction and Contemporary Art. London, New York, Verso Publ., 2019, 336 p.

22. Varnedoe K. Pictures of Nothing: Abstract Art Since Pollock. Princeton, Princeton University Press Publ., 2006, 320 p.

23. Berger A. Scotland, VirtualWayfarer. Available at: https://virtualwayfarer.com/tag/scotland/ (accessed 05.06.2025).

24. Serra R. Robeson., Google Arts & Culture. Available at: https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/robeson-0000/mwF2ajKI2MTGVQ (accessed 05.06.2025).

25. Bogza G. Brâncuși. București, Meridiane Publ., 1965, 72 p.

26. Show A. Sculptor Richard Serra Has Died at the Age of 85: Obituary, The Art Newspaper Russia. 2024 March 28. Available at: https://www.theartnewspaper.ru/posts/20240328-odcy/ (accessed 05.06.2025) (in Russ.).

27. Jennings G. (ed.) Abstract Video: The Moving Image in Contemporary Art. Oakland, University of California Press Publ., 2015, 304 p.